|
|
bugjack Inner circle New York, New York 1624 Posts |
This is very good. I'm sure it's based on something totally obvious, and perhaps my brain is just locked in some kind of feedback loop, but it seems baffling to me:
http://www.regiftable.com/regiftingrobinpopup.html (Okay, I'm editing this moments later... yes, simple, obvious but still very good. The online presentation which allows one to keep trying obscures the method nicely.) |
eSamuels Inner circle 3085 Posts |
It is very clever. If you study the chart carefully (each time), you'll pick up on the method!
|
Sixten Inner circle Floral Park, NY, U.S.A. 4654 Posts |
It's a clever principle. (Didn't work when I gave it a go)
It went 0-for-3. I picked 86. (All 3 times) (Final number: 72) Sixten |
Magicsquared Inner circle 1262 Posts |
Sixten,
There's no way it can't work. |
Chris K Inner circle 2544 Posts |
Magicsquared is correct, you are simply missing something as 86 works every time, just as every other number does.
Did you click on next to actually see what she predicted after you looked at 72? Lem |
Sixten Inner circle Floral Park, NY, U.S.A. 4654 Posts |
Yup!
Right to the female voice giving the answer. (Also, the gift showed) Maybe it was a fluke? O.K.: Went back again/ Same ending number; 72 This time it came out: "Happy Face Mug" Saw the way the chart is arranged with H.F.M.. Displayed in 10 separate boxes. Not a math major. Again, clever, though! Reminds me of something, like, Max Maven would do. (In a magic TV special.) Sixten |
Slim King Eternal Order Orlando 18012 Posts |
Jim Callahan had something on his site like this years ago. Perhaps it's still there?
There is a better way to do this But this is the wrong place to discuss it.
THE MAN THE SKEPTICS REFUSE TO TEST FOR ONE MILLION DOLLARS.. The Worlds Foremost Authority on Houdini's Life after Death.....
|
Paul Spaniels Loyal user Hull, UK 249 Posts |
That was pretty cool the first time, but it doesn't take too long to realise what's going on. That's the problem with maths tricks that aren't well disguised, you can always work them out sooner or later. Maybe this would've been better if they only let you have one go?
|
kyle_freemason Elite user 409 Posts |
I think on Jims site...the effect was with cards? I believe it was anyway
MM
Butler # 254 |
videokideo Special user 895 Posts |
This is one of the better versions ive seen if you give them limited visual time on the chart. It nailed me the first time, but once I looked closer (with more time of course) it was noticeable.
Nice... |
Max Maven V.I.P. 266 Posts |
Quote:
On 2009-03-09 18:47, Sixten wrote: And, in fact, did do. I created this in the late 1980s, and first performed it on "The Best of Magic" series on Thames television (Great Britain). In recent years several versions have cropped up on the Internet, albeit lacking several subtleties that were in the original routine. |
Matthew Townsend Inner circle 1302 Posts |
Nice effect, quite easy to figure out though. I am sure Max's had some nice subtlties that made it a bit harder to figure out.
Good to hear your (electronic) voice on the Café again Max!!! Peace & Love Matt |
rowdymagi5 Inner circle Virginia 3613 Posts |
Nice to see Max Maven posting on here! Now where is that new work on the "Gilbreath Principle"? Im sure he is tired of that question!!
|
Alel Special user Bay Area 668 Posts |
Quote:
On 2009-03-10 04:42, Matthew Shepherd wrote: It is easy to figure out if too much attention is directed to the arithmetic procedure. Repition calls attention to the arithmetics. If this is only done once in a performance, then it is harder to figure out. Max, I wonder if you have written about this principle in any book? Because I would love to know and learn the subtle points that you have developed over the years in the application of this principle. |
Slim King Eternal Order Orlando 18012 Posts |
Quote:
On 2009-03-10 04:22, Max Maven wrote: Is there any footage (if they even use that term anymore) or anything on youtube about the program. This bare bones approach is way too revealing. Again ... this is the wrong place for this. (Just imagine 29 years of Max Maven improvements )
THE MAN THE SKEPTICS REFUSE TO TEST FOR ONE MILLION DOLLARS.. The Worlds Foremost Authority on Houdini's Life after Death.....
|
lane99 Elite user 421 Posts |
True, it is a double edged sword. But being able to repeat it is one of the strengths of this. Otherwise most people will just assume that the result always ends up as the same item. Of course, if someone is really determined to crack the code, eventually they will.
Here's a cooler version of this, that might send a slight shiver up the occasional spine: http://www.cyberglass.biz/flshstuff/mindreader.php Somehow seems more mystical when using symbols and heiroglyphics. With regard to which, Max Maven's work again springing to "mind". As in VideoMind, as in Mind's Eye Deck (that's the name, if memory serves. Pardon me, if I'm mistaken). |
Slim King Eternal Order Orlando 18012 Posts |
I like this one much better.
THE MAN THE SKEPTICS REFUSE TO TEST FOR ONE MILLION DOLLARS.. The Worlds Foremost Authority on Houdini's Life after Death.....
|
Lew Stricker New user Canada 27 Posts |
Magication's Arithmepic is also based on this principle.
|
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » Online mentalism trick (0 Likes) |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.02 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |